It is terribly sad that the NAACP and their victocrat acolytes never seem to miss an opportunity to find racism even in the most innocuous circumstances (“Greeting card delivers slight to blacks, some say,” Saturday).

The graduation card in your headline was probably a little silly but how can “black hole” in what was clearly an astronomical context possibly be construed as racism? The NAACP is unfortunately showing itself as an overtly race-baiting organization when it should be tackling the appalling dropout rate of minorities and those thankfully few remaining cases of true racism.

– Martyn Andrews, Lomita

With all due respect, perhaps Olivia Verrett and Wilma Wilson are unaware of the astronomical theory of “black holes.” Or perhaps they think Stephen Hawking is a racist. This kind of hyperbolic sensitivity does nothing to enhance race relations.

If you really want to be offended, ladies, try listening to just about any piece of rap music.

– Stephanie Monash, Manhattan Beach

I read in Saturday’s newspaper regarding the NAACP and its members being upset about a Hallmark greeting card which uses the phrase “black holes” (referring to an infinite hole in space which nothing can escape, including light) in its message about school graduations and how they relate to our galaxy. Does anyone with half a brain really believe that Hallmark said “black ho” (negative slur for black prostitute) in its card’s message talking about our galaxy? Wouldn’t it be more responsible for the NAACP to simply contact Hallmark for an explanation rather than choose to see something they don’t like or don’t understand as a racial issue? If the NAACP wants to be taken seriously by all racial groups then it must begin to act more responsibly and not continue to make these types of reckless accusations, which do nothing to promote unity and do everything to promote division!

– Rod Guyton, Torrance

Church doesn’t need addition

I am writing about the article describing the pending construction of a new $25 million sanctuary at St. John Fisher in Rancho Palos Verdes.

Interesting timing, I must say. When all things economical seem to be crumbling around us, St. John Fisher is going to build a new church! There is already a church there. There is a convent there too, but the nuns had to leave years ago. There is a wonderful Parish Center and ample classroom facilities for a student body that is smaller than most college lab classes. I am a former parishioner and now live in Redondo Beach. We have all had to adjust our lives accordingly to cope with overspending in every sense of the word.

But apparently it is OK to go ahead with this project. An absurd idea!

Here’s another equally crazy idea: Paint the place, fix it up a little and feed some hungry people! Crazy? What would Jesus do?

The proposed projects Cicoria objects to would both significantly improve city parks. The Annenberg project will spend over half its budget on improvements other than the proposed building. The end result will be restoration to natural habitat and public access to a large portion of the land now used for a commercial, for-profit farm. The building would have a low and green profile and would provide opportunities to augment existing programs at Point Vicente Interpretive Center.

At Abalone Cove the proposed project would provide better access to the beach. The building would allow for a better staff presence and would allow support for Sealab’s habitat restoration efforts and park rangers’ environmental protection efforts. The building would be on land currently occupied by a portion of the parking lot and would not be very visible at all. The parking lot would be redesigned to take up less space (and yet still provide as much parking) and to be more environmentally friendly.

Abalone Cove and Lower Point Vicente are city parks, not part of the city’s two-square-mile open space nature preserve that covers about 15percent of the city’s land area.

Both parks have been neglected for years and fall far short of their potential. Rancho Palos Verdes has been the lucky beneficiary of tens of millions of dollars of grants from state and federal taxpayers. Local contributions have provided only about 5 percent of the costs of open-space preservation in the city. On our own, we would have achieved little. Rancho Palos Verdes needs to treat its public lands as the regional responsibilities that they are by taking steps to make them reasonably accessible to others as well as to its own residents.

Join the Conversation

We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments, we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or government request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions.

If you see comments that you find offensive, please use the “Flag as Inappropriate” feature by hovering over the right side of the post, and pulling down on the arrow that appears. Or, contact our editors by emailing moderator@scng.com.